Notice: Home alone tonight?
Topic: What if... America went commuinst.
+Anonymous A — 9 months ago #67,186
Considering how we're seeing the beginnings of a new fascist government. What if people get so fed up with this shit that they adopt a more communist mindset just for the lulz and to spite this new government?
I wonder which side Putin and Russia would find themselves on. It'll be ironic to see Russia fighting against communism. Then again, Putin clearly wanted to revitalize the Soviet Union so perhaps this is his way of bringing back the communist manifesto.
Having the United States adopt communism sounds like a massive victory for Mother Russia and that means Trump, his goons, and all the retarded conservatives are just tools.
+Anonymous B — 9 months ago, 12 minutes later[T] [B] #667,818
Workers of the world unite!
They call democrats communists whenever they have an idea left of hunting the homeless for sport. A fucking oligarch is in charge of the treasury and literally did a coup. Fuck Leon fuck Trump and fuck the spineless judiciary and legislature that enabled the orange tyrant. The people who voted for Trump basically wanted a fascist dictator to own the libs fuck them too.
I say fuck them and embrace the hammer and sickle.
Also we would be besties with China 😂
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
·Anonymous A (OP) — 9 months ago, 21 minutes later, 33 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,841
@previous (B)
The People's Republic of China 🇨🇳 is only "communist" on paper. If they were serious about adopting communism there wouldn't be any Chinese billionaires.
They're as capitalistic as the U.S. and Russia. That wall came down, darling.
·Anonymous B — 9 months ago, 3 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,842
@previous (A)
Then maybe once we reign in our capitalist oligarchs we will set an example.
+Anonymous C — 9 months ago, 1 minute later, 38 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,843
@667,841 (A)
China is a state capitalist country. It’s still a form of capitalism, but it is very different from Russia or the United States. The party has absolute power and has partial ownership in all Chinese companies, which means the Chinese government can affect the outcome of board decisions in all Chinese companies. In China, there is totalitarian state control over the economy when necessary, but they also benefit from free market economics when the Chinese government doesn’t want or doesn’t need to be involved. It is not comparable to oligarchy and Chinese billionaires are controlled by the CCP and absolutely not the other way around.
·Anonymous A (OP) — 9 months ago, 4 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,844
@previous (C)
So, it's basically Capitalistic Communism?
·Anonymous C — 9 months ago, 6 minutes later, 50 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,846
@previous (A)
They say "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and "democratic dictatorship" as propaganda terms. But there is a hint of truth in both names. "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" isn’t a real thing, but it is true that China is Marxist in theory as in Marxist Leninism not original Marxist thought (which is authoritarian and requires the government to control the economy as opposed to the workers owning the means of production). "Democratic dictatorship" is supposed to mean that China is a "democracy" where "the people" have absolute control over their government (dictatorship = good). But in reality "democratic dictatorship" means the party has absolute power (but they want Chinese people to think the people and the party are one and the same), and the government takes the "structure" of a democracy, even though it’s a dictatorship. For example, in the Chinese constitution, all men and women over the age of 18 have the right to vote, in theory there is a congress, and the leader is called a "president." But in practice, Chinese citizens can only vote for local leaders in inconsequential local elections and then people who are CCP members in higher levels of government will only promote people who are in line with the state ideology so nothing changes. It’s really just a sort of authoritarian bending of Marxism and capitalism and democracy into this weird mutated totalitarian thing where nothing means what its name would suggest it means.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
·Anonymous C — 9 months ago, 1 minute later, 51 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,847
@previous (C)
Basically, China is its own thing and nothing is really exactly the same. The closest thing is probably Vietnam, but even Vietnam is kinda different.
·Anonymous A (OP) — 9 months ago, 3 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[T] [B] #667,849
@667,846 (C)
How come this sounds like where the United States has been heading for the past few decades since Ronald Reagan?
And why does it seem like local elections in the U.S. are less inconsequential than the federal elections? Like marijuana being legal in certain states while still be illegal federally.
·Anonymous C — 9 months ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #667,856
@previous (A)
I guess an analogy could be a computer. A computer has hardware and a computer has software. The software is the instructions which the hardware executes. In the same way, laws are the software which a society must execute in order to form a functioning state. But unlike machines, humans have their own wills and desires and motives, so they will not follow instructions perfectly. If the constitution says one thing, people will do another. For example, according to the constitution America cannot declare war unless congress votes to declare war. World War Two was the last time congress declared war, which means every war after World War Two was technically unconstitutional, yet the entire time America was touting a "rules based international order." The most important thing isn’t the rules, it’s who has what incentives to do what. Money polluted our country, so we can’t commit to our ideology. Now most Americans believe that America stands for capitalism, but the word "capitalism" is not in our constitution. We never were obligated to do this.
·Anonymous C — 9 months ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[T] [B] #667,858
@previous (C)
Ironically, World War Two was the last war in history I think that a vast majority of all Americans from both sides of the political spectrum would say was a definite victory for our country (regardless of whether they agree that the means to achieve that victory were ethical or not). Which is a strange instance of the universe actually aligning with morality. Usually it doesn’t work out that way.
+Anonymous D — 9 months ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[T] [B] #668,075
.
+Anonymous E — 9 months ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[T] [B] #668,076
@OP
In the beginning, there was nothing.
On the first day, there was Trump.
On the second day:
https://youtu.be/Th-Z6le3bHA ·Anonymous E — 9 months ago, 38 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[T] [B] #668,077
Bye bye Ukraine!
+Anonymous F — 9 months ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[T] [B] #668,132
+Anonymous G — 9 months ago, 1 day later, 2 days after the original post[T] [B] #668,521
Rest assure that you never have any freedom or choice on your job or rights. You will follow whoever your chairman said. Unless the military had the backbone to said otherwise of course!
+Anonymous H — 9 months ago, 18 hours later, 3 days after the original post[T] [B] #668,624
@previous (G)
Slaving away for a rich prick beats slaving away for your country?
+Anonymous I — 9 months ago, 2 hours later, 3 days after the original post[T] [B] #668,636
Sounds based.